Nitwit hits Twitter with writ

Originally posted by Emphursis
And what about his right to privacy?
Just because he is in the publics eye, doesn't mean he isn't allowed a private life with the expectation that is remains private.

Why though?

Would you be protected if this happened to you..... if you were married and cheated on your wife/husband, could you afford a gagging order to silence the press and person you cheated with?


It's bollocks...

If you don't want it reported, how about keep it in your pants...

Originally posted by blupblup

Originally posted by Emphursis
And what about his right to privacy?
Just because he is in the publics eye, doesn't mean he isn't allowed a private life with the expectation that is remains private.

Why though?

Would you be protected if this happened to you..... if you were married and cheated on your wife/husband, could you afford a gagging order to silence the press and person you cheated with?


It's bollocks...

If you don't want it reported, how about keep it in your pants...

people are people and have affairs, it doesn't matter if your rich middle classed or poor, human instinct is human instinct. And No I could not afford a super injunction, but there again if I had an affair it wouldn't be splashed all over the front of tomorrows newspapers would it.

All this clamour about the press and freedom of speech is bollocks, how is it in the best interests of the nation to know which celebrity slept around? The press just want to sell papers in any way they can, and if that means ruining lives to do it they will, it wont matter to them that the pictures they spread all over the newspaper with lurid headlines, and semi naked photos of the woman will affect his kids or his wife who are all innocent in this, and making the chances of reconciliation even more difficult.

Just as they would publish the story from Imogen, telling how bad he is for cheating on his wife with her, yet failing to mention how she chased him and spread her legs knowing he was married, and she is pissed because her plan to get a free 100k for nothing is out of the window. These are nots newspapers, they decry how the rich and famous all have sordid affairs, and yet cover the paper in scantily clad women, naked photos on page 3 and use sex to sell the paper, hypocrisy at its finest

If you want to fight over freedom of speech then fight for it, over things that matter, like the UK government now censoring video's on youtube about protests happening in the UK, but crying foul (pun intended) over some footballer wanting to protect his privacy is stupid

Let us not forget, though, Members of Parliament and political party in the United Kingdom spend millions on social networking in order to gain new members and keep in touch with the grass roots. The political class have no interest in seeing Twitter restrained.

reply to post by infinite


Of course they want to censor it. They will still use it for themselves, only we will only be able to read and write tweets that they approve of.

reply to post by PrinceDreamer


Lets put this into perspective.

People in high-paid positions are role models. They are the people that are looked up to for inspiration. They are at the top of the ladder and people will copy what they do because they want to get to the top also. They have a responsibility to behave in a reasonable manner, I am not saying they should be saints because no human is a saint, but they should show respect to the people who put them in their position.

The majority of people at the top are there at our expense. We pay their wages, be it through taxes, licensing, tickets to events, buying their products or whatever. But they are often irresponsible, and disrespectful and because they are rich, they have the ability to buy their way out of trouble. If a high profile person makes a mistake then why does money make them exempt from consequences?. An example needs to be set. If they lose their family because they cheated then GOOD. It will send a message that there are consequences to their actions.

People might think infidelity is nothing major but I assure you it is huge, it destroys lives and leaves deep scars. I dont get why there is no law against it. Just goes to show how corrupt the law in this country is, loads of petty laws for victimless crimes.

What a waste of time from this fella. Is he going to stop blogs as well? They feature in top google serches as well. If you gag social websites (which is impossible) there are also other means to get this info out.

Im guessing its just some lawers rubbing there hands together with the thought of easy money. Gag the internet what a farce.

Hi, my name is Ryan Giggs.
lololol I'm so naughty

reply to post by Firefly_


In perspective? How is being a good footballer got anything to do with human emotion? Just because you are good at something does not alter the rest of your human DNA, yes you have to realise there will be added media attention but it doesn't alter your natural instincts. Nor does it serve the public interest to have his face and lurid stories published all over the front of tabloids, it just sells papers so gimps like Murdoch make more profit.

If they lose their family because they cheated then GOOD. It will send a message that there are consequences to their actions

How is it good for his children? because YOU say so? Guess what you are not the moral police for the world.

People might think infidelity is nothing major but I assure you it is huge, it destroys lives and leaves deep scars. I dont get why there is no law against it. Just goes to show how corrupt the law in this country is, loads of petty laws for victimless crimes.

Oh like they have such laws in Saudi and other strict Muslim countries? Where people, mostly women are stoned to death for infidelity?

You really need to think about what your saying because honestly you sound like a knee jerk reaction moron

BREAKING NEWS : Manchester United team to face Barcelona in saturdays Champ league Final

Van Der Sar
Rafael
Ferdinand
Vidic
Evra
Valencia
Carrick
Park
An Un-named Premier League Footballer (who has won it 12 times btw)
Rooney
Hernandez

A married footballer named on Twitter as having an injunction over an alleged affair with a reality TV star has been identified in Parliament as Ryan Giggs.

Using parliamentary privilege to break the court order, he said it would not be practical to imprison the 75,000 Twitter users who had named the player

www.bbc.co.uk...

this was always going to be the outcome....don't know why he didn't just confess to his wife immediately,let the gossip tabloids have their week of sensationalism and get on with it.
As far as I can see he has made a bad situation for his family even worse

reply to post by JackieO


How the hell can you take legal action against someone who is anonymousness is on the net? The next thing we will see is that all bloggers who do the exact same thing will be sued because some idiot wants to make a show. Hey look don't be stupid and people won't twit about it get used to it scrub.


PS: WE ARE UNITED!!!!! FOREVER UNITED!!! GO MANU!

I don't think he's the worst guy out there. He stopped his Ferrari outside the shop I used to work in to hurriedly use the payphone back in 2000 and had time to sign autographs for two awestruck kids who were adhered to the phonebox glass. His car is much better looking than he is.

That being said, him and those in the same positions of relative power as him are increasingly spoilt by their circumstances and they think they are above people most of the time.

He dropped his trousers, he got caught, people gossiped. That's what people do, and they'll do it with or without Twitter, and with or without getting sued. While I do think there are more worthwhile things for newspapers to be printing and that this is all fluff, I'd hate to see the free speech of social networking be restrained because of him thinking with his lower brain.

In any case, he's made this a hundred times worse for himself and his family. Maybe he'll learn some sense in the future, but I highly doubt it.